Integrating Multiple Sources to Reconstruct the Pre- and Early Postcolonial Forests of the Chesapeake: 1588–1838

Abstract

Multiple historic sources were used to reconstruct the forests of the Chesapeake at the time of European colonization. Early written records (1588–1699) show forests composed of hardwoods and conifers; the most commonly reported hardwoods are oak (100% occurrence in the texts), followed by walnut (93.3%), sassafras (86.7%), mulberry (80.0%), ash (60.0%), and chestnut (60.0%), and the most commonly reported conifers cedar (92.9%), pine (86.7%), and cypress (73.3%). It is likely that these reports focused on trees of economic value. John Smith’s 1612 map of the Chesapeake shows a forest composed of ca. 50:50 ratio of hardwoods to conifers. Hardwoods could not be identified further, while conifers could be grouped into what appear to be pine, cedar, and baldcypress. Advertisements of land for sale or lease (1751–1838) show a forest primarily composed of hardwoods (86.5%), predominantly oak, with a small conifer component (13.5%). Forest cover averaged 61.5% and ranged from 19.7 to 100%. There is no relationship between percentage of forest cover and date of advertisement, indicating little change over that time frame on settled land. Advertisements of wood for sale or wanted also indicate a forest dominated by oak. Oak was the primary material for ship construction and barrel making, as well as the major fuel source. Witness tree records from the seventeenth century (the earliest reported) on Maryland’s Eastern Shore show that a mature Oak–Pine forest dominated the pre-settlement forest, with white oak (Quercus alba) the most common hardwood. Currently a Pine–Oak–Maple forest dominates the landscape, with pines the dominant conifer and maple, particularly red maple (Acer rubrum), the dominant hardwood, mainly due to fire suppression in the twentieth century.